Talk:Items (MARDEK)
Items (MARDEK) - Overhaul At the moment the Items (MARDEK) pages are undergoing a bit of an overhaul, and it seems to me that we should fix everything major that needs to be fixed in one fell swoop. Here's a list of things which need to be done: *Finish updating all item pages to the new template. *Fix page and item names, to match their in-game counterparts (R.Plating, and possibly more). *Organize all kinds of items- not just accessories -as necessary, as described here and here. *Upload full-size item sprites. (In MARDEK, sprites are made of 3px*3px blocks, not 2px*2px blocks.) If there's anything else that you think needs to be done, feel free to add it to the list. We can debate at length anything which doesn't seem necessary too. --DK 02:58, June 9, 2012 (UTC) :I was checking through MARDEK again for discrepancies and such, and noticed that items were classified twice. First, they were broken into a group, such as weapons. Then they were broken up into a particular kind of weapon, such as swords. We kind of already do this, but the naming is different. In MARDEK, the two classes are always capitalized, and the kind always follows the group; combining my two previous examples, you would get WEAPON: SWORD in-game. Should the item pages be named likewise? :In other words, should the page "Swords (MARDEK)" become "WEAPONS: SWORDS (MARDEK)" (or perhaps just "WEAPONS: SWORDS"), or should they stay as they are? :--DK 06:25, June 9, 2012 (UTC) The header colour for Dark items needs to be changed. It completely hides the Dark glyph, and messes up several of the item icons (see ). Also, what with the new pages, someone has to redo the MItemLink and MItemImgLink templates for those items now on Page 2. Firecrow91 20:00, June 10, 2012 (UTC) :Yeah, I'm working on the color issue now. I'll take a look at MItemLink and MItemImgLink when I'm done. :--DK 20:03, June 10, 2012 (UTC) ::OK, I've got a temporary fix working. Glyphs are removed for now, since users can tell what element an item is by it's color and by the parameters section. ::I say "temporary" because I've been working on a restructuring of the template for a few days, since the current one is somewhat ugly and hard to read in my opinion. But the parameters won't change, so we won't have to go back and reformat all of the items again, no! (Although I might add a type parameter to the list - that wouldn't be too hard to add to every item, I think. I'm not sure about this one.) ::But yes, this problem is averted, and a less ugly fix is coming soon! ::--DK 20:52, June 10, 2012 (UTC) Welp, the new item template is up. doesn't seem to be doing its horizontal-spacing job very well at the moment - it ceases to horizontally space things after its second use, it seems. I'll have a look at it later, but I'm none too confident that I'll be able to fix it - I thought I had it working perfectly before.... But yes, the new template is up, which is good. I've made a few very minor tweaks between the version which is currently up, and the version which I constructed on my testing page. Nothing major - a few recolors, mostly. I haven't added a type parameter, but I think that perhaps one could be used. How 'bout you guys? The image box stretches horizontally exactly 5px (thank you GIMP and screenshots) when you expand the item box, and shrinks the exact same amount in the exact same direction when you hide everything besides the header. It rather annoys me, so if anyone can find a solution to that, that'd be great. Oh yeah, and I've used a grand total of one table - I'd rather keep it that way, so that we don't have extra elements or formatting issues flying recklessly about in their fancy new convertible cars, running red lights and crashing into pedestrians. Styling is in many ways harder when you have tables inside of tables inside of tables, I've found. Plus, we'd have to restyle just about everything in order to achieve a similar look. So yes, let's keep it down to a single table. --DK 03:19, June 13, 2012 (UTC) Item Source Spacing We need a better way to separate different methods of obtaining items of the same type (eg different monsters, different shops, etc.) None of the options we currently have work very well... Block of Text: '''Completely illegible, and should be avoided at all costs. '''New lines: Nice, clear, legible, but makes item boxes very long. Spacers: Assuming we can get the template working, this will still only be a slight improvement in legibility over a block of text, and some sources will still be cut in half by line breaks. Background bubble?: A template that made something like the usernames on fighunter.com would solve all these problems, but I don't even know if it's possible, since tables must always be on a new line... We're probably going to end up going with the spacers, but if anyone has any other suggestions they should post them here. Firecrow91 05:20, June 16, 2012 (UTC) :I'm not sure the "bubble method" you described would work. Presuming that has the longest box when expanded, and presupposing that all item boxes are that extreme length (when in fact, most are smaller), we conclude that there would need to be many, many "bubbles" for every box. Here's what a page on Fig Hunter with many*10^23 bubbles looks like. Supposing that every item box had half that many bubbles, I dare say the item boxes wouldn't be very legible. :tl;dr version: items with many values per parameter, such as the humble potion, will have so many bubbles that they'll no-longer be easily readable. :From my testing, I've concluded that likely (~90%) won't work. And even if did work, as you said, spacers "will still only be a slight improvement in legibility over a block of text." If spacers are pretty much Block of Text lite, then why bother using them at all? Especially since spacers require four more characters than line-breaks (and with pages like Expendable Items, those four characters will quickly add up). :I'd rather take the option that uses the least amount of code, and has the greatest readability factor - even if people with smaller screens have to scroll once or twice to see everything. In addition, everything that I've stated assumes that all item boxes are the same length as potion - a complete fallacy. In fact, the majority of item boxes are much shorter. Plus, all of this doesn't take into account the fact that these item boxes autohide. :So really, I don't see how length is such a huge issue, unlike, say, unseeable elemental glyphs, or background colors which don't match our standards and cause difficulty in reading. :--DK 07:01, June 16, 2012 (UTC)